Saavedra v. Runnels
Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM
California state prisoner Alfonso Almasan Saavedra appeals pro se from the dis
Saavedra contends that the trial court’s jury instruction regarding prior bad acts of domestic violence to show propensity violated his rights by lessening the burden of proof. We conclude that any alleged error in the jury instructions did not render the proceedings fundamentally unfair and thus did not violate Saavedra’s right to due process. See Estelle v. McGuire, 502 U.S. 62, 71-73, 112 S.Ct. 475, 116 L.Ed.2d 385 (1991); Gibson v. Ortiz, 387 F.3d 812, 822 (9th Cir. 2004).
Accordingly, we conclude that the state court’s decision was not contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, as determined by the United States Supreme Court. See 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Alfonso Almasan SAAVEDRA v. D.L. RUNNELS
- Status
- Published